Last week was the really big one-off Bibliography conference that I went to to hang with Todd and my diss chair. (I did submit proposals for a paper and for membership in a working group and got ~denied). In addition to a bunch of interesting papers, the conversations in between sessions and at the receptions centered around, on the one hand, a lot of self-congratulation (look at us! acknowledging that there is a world beyond Europe!) and anxiety; a telling moment was at a luncheon on social justice I went to where one person asked "Who here feels like they belong?" and only like three people in a room of 30something did. Also at said social justice luncheon, we spent an hour avoiding words like "race" and "queer" and so on, even though it was directly in response to Charlottesville because that's where the organization was located. (Admittedly I said them in the context of promoting my project, but there was no engagement with that. So, I tried.)
I knew I didn't feel like I belong; I'm not now nor have ever been someone from the Ivies, much of my scholarship has been devoted to popular culture, etc. (I'm so tempted to add "I'm not a self-absorbed prat" but that seems mean since it doesn't apply to a number of people, even if it does to a bunch of others.) To my surprise I asked Todd if he felt he did, and he said no as well; he's a white dude, maybe he didn't go to Ivies but he def went to the tiers after that, he's very focused on traditional print history.
I'm still trying to process, but I would argue that acknowledging gaps, erasures, and so on do not remedy them. There's still work to be done. But will it, and will it be within the established context of the powerful hierarchies involved?
I knew I didn't feel like I belong; I'm not now nor have ever been someone from the Ivies, much of my scholarship has been devoted to popular culture, etc. (I'm so tempted to add "I'm not a self-absorbed prat" but that seems mean since it doesn't apply to a number of people, even if it does to a bunch of others.) To my surprise I asked Todd if he felt he did, and he said no as well; he's a white dude, maybe he didn't go to Ivies but he def went to the tiers after that, he's very focused on traditional print history.
I'm still trying to process, but I would argue that acknowledging gaps, erasures, and so on do not remedy them. There's still work to be done. But will it, and will it be within the established context of the powerful hierarchies involved?
(no subject)
Date: 2017-10-18 05:02 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-10-18 04:54 pm (UTC)Was talking to a friend about it. You have the powerful organization that sets the standard for the field and is incredibly Euro-centric, congratulating itself on acknowledging CHINA. So how to change that? Do you play along, seek to get as far as you can and push for change from within, or do you work to create an alternative? The latter is, I think, my long-term goal, but my friend argues that that is some "separate but equal bullshit." Which, maybe. But within the structures of what we it is genuinely possible we can do, I think it's more likely. *ponders*
(no subject)
Date: 2017-10-20 01:57 pm (UTC)My limited interactions with folks from the ivies and Big 10 schools is that there is a higher proportion of prat-ness. Not 100%, and probably not even over 50% these days with the folks who have graduated from the 90s onward, but... still. Lots of inherent privilege and arrogance. I admit to an anti-Ivy bias when I'm hiring, because people who went to "regular" schools seem to be more practically oriented and less self-conscious.
In my nonprofit work I have found that woke white people (me included) are super reluctant to be "pushy" about proposing solutions, and that most woke white people aren't as woke as they think they are, which means that the POC who are included in the group/management/decision making often keep their mouths shut on criticism because they know the white folks won't handle it well. The only time it works out is when the POCs are Vice Presidents and CEOs and other senior managers, at which point sometimes there is a useful discussion with some actual actions coming out of it. Otherwise, it's a room full of people being euphemistic about how shitty things are. If it's a POC leading the conversation, it's easier to ask (open ended) questions and make suggestions that they can then accept/critique/reject.
More POC in positions of final decision-making is key. The queer white women are important, too, but it's generational, and my experience has been that the older white ladies are still deeply defensive of their own wokeness and are threatened by younger/different/queerer/nonwhite women who are in the midst of coming up. "Please understand that my experience of feminism is different" sometimes works for me in those conversations, but gosh. It's all so hard.
(no subject)
Date: 2017-10-20 06:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2017-10-23 09:10 pm (UTC)contemplates with you I think your friends' phrasing of "separate but equal-type bullshit" is harsh but contains a grain of truth. TThere's already a large organization with lots of resources, so building a hole new organization for non-Western topics and people might be less practical than increasing inclusiveness in the current org.
Also hugs you
(no subject)
Date: 2017-10-25 06:19 pm (UTC)